Patterico's Pontifications

12/18/2012

Rice Has Withdrawn, But Apparently Team Rice Supports Donilon for SoS

Filed under: General — JD @ 5:31 am

[Guest post by JD]

Though it seems Sen Winter Soldier will be nominated for Sec of State, it seems Team Rice is pushing for Donilon. wouldn’t Donilon face many of the same hurdles as Rice, under Oath?

I saw rumors that Dukakis was being considered for Kerry’s seat, as was Kennedy’s widow.

As a thought experiment, what questions would you ask of Kerry during the confirmation hearings?

– JD

26 Responses to “Rice Has Withdrawn, But Apparently Team Rice Supports Donilon for SoS”

  1. Sen Kerry, when do you think it is appropriate to meet with our countries enemies during a time of war? Do you think that any soldier, airman, marine, or naval personnel should be allowed to do so?

    Sen Kerry, please describe for us what you were doing when you threw away your medals? Do you still have them?

    JD (318f81)

  2. R.I.P. Senator Daniel Inouye

    Icy (75ccb6)

  3. Senator, what in your background is your excuse for being an arrogant, self-centered rectal orifice?

    Bar Sinister (664312)

  4. If Rice is pushing for Donilon as Secretary of State, it is not because Rice and friends want him as Secretary of State. (they should not – Donilon is close to Clinton and Rice isn’t anymore, and Donilon is now very much a “realist” against all interventions except maybe ones that include Saudi Arabia.)

    Tom Donilon was Chief of Staff for Secretary of State (and former Deputy Attorney General in the Johnson Administration, who, in 1967, in a speech in Los Angeles denied that organized crime existed in California and said even the known members who resided there had no major ties – all supposedly because of the “quality, honesty and integrity” of the law enforcement agencies in the area) Warren Christopher. Warren Christopher died this year.

    He also had ties to Biden and was a lawyer for Penny Pritzker, 2008 Obama finance chair. Tom Donilon’s wife is Chief of Staff to Jill Biden (the Second Lady) and his brother Michael works for Biden, or that was the case in 2010, when he got promoted to his current job. I think Tom Donilon also worked for Biden in the past.

    His brother Michael was also one of $1,000 contributors (the maximum) to the Clinton legal defense fund as of December, 1996.

    The reason the Rice people were for this is to create a vacancy in the office of National Security Adviser, so Susan Rice can be appointed to that position.

    But the possible game of musical chairs on the table I understood was this:

    White House Chief of Staff (and former budget director) gets nominated Secretary of the Treasury to replace Tim Geithner.

    Tom Donilon gets appointed White House Chief of Staff. (He was under consideration apparently when Rahm Emmanuel quit)

    Susan Rice gets appointed National Security Adviser.

    Samantha Powers gets apointed Ambasssador to the United Nations.

    Meanwhile, former Nebraska Senator Chuck Hagel seems to be in line to become Secretary of Defense. He would be the worst Secretary of Defense since Louis A. Johnson in 1949-50. Louis A. Johnson slashed defense – until the Korean War intervened.

    Hagel seems to be ready to take a course Obama is said to agree on – reduce forces in Europe, build up a little around China, and ignore the Middle East.

    THere is already some opposition building to Hagel.

    Why not David Petraeus? There’s no legal disqualification for him. Panetta also was CIA Director before (also James R. Schlesinger in 1973. Schlesinger’s maybe not a good precedent. Later, he was Jimmy Carter’s Secretary of Energy and persuaded him to impose totally unnecessary rationing in 1978-79. Ford removed him from Defense in the 1975 “Halloween massacre” and put Donald Rumsfeld in his place.)

    David Petraeus could also be Secretary of State, but Defense is really up his alley.

    Of course that adultery was very very wrong, but it could be put aside since nothing is being done about it anyway, and most other possibilities for the Cabinet have more relevant and continuing character flaws

    Sammy Finkelman (e4c3a1)

  5. I also read about Dukakis as a possible Senator. He would most likely be a placeholder – for a Kennedy?

    Or just till the special election – this way Deval Patrick wouldn’t be picking favorites.

    Sammy Finkelman (e4c3a1)

  6. Comment by JD (318f81) — 12/18/2012 @ 5:34 am

    Sen Kerry, please describe for us what you were doing when you threw away your medals? Do you still have them?

    He already answered about those medals. Yes, he kept them. That scene was staged with somebody else’s medals. He’s already admited tha.

    If you really want to embarrass John Kerry, ask him when he first started saying his boat had gone into Cambodia. Because I think the record will show he did NOT say that in the early 1970s, when he was saying all those other things about his time in Vietnam (well,mostly those of others)

    I think the record will show he first started saying that in 1978 and 1979 – when the movie “Apocalypse Now” came out. He wanted to say that movie was about him!

    People were sympathetic to that captain in the movie, (Martin Sheen) so it was good for him if the Massachusetts electorate thought that, or better than other things.

    By the mid-1980s, it was seared in his memory. Now, it’s gone.

    Sammy Finkelman (e4c3a1)

  7. I wouldn’t place too much stock in the recommendation of a proven liar.

    Icy (49262e)

  8. Sen. Kerry, if a US Ambassador is threatened and US forces are in position to respond, under what circumstances would it be appropriate to just let them die?

    Sen. Kerry, if armed gangs from a foreign nation smuggle drugs into the United States, our response should be:
    a) arm them
    b)oppose them

    Sen. Kerry, you served mere months in Vietnam, pissed off nearly every officer who served with you, then served in the Senate with no real legislative accomplishments. What makes you think you are qualified…

    ukuleledave (c59551)

  9. Lemee see, a useless fabulist, kept metrosexual, and obsessive egotist or a congenital political hack.

    John, you ready for duty?

    gary gulrud (dd7d4e)

  10. “…what questions would you ask of Kerry during the confirmation hearings?”

    Why haven’t you been arrested, tried and executed for treason?

    Dave Surls (46b08c)

  11. The entire National Security Team (SecState, SecDef, DNI, CIA, National Security Advisor, & the UN Amb) need to be sacked, and replaced – not recycled!

    askeptic (b8ab92)

  12. While I would have strongly objected to Lurch as Secretary of Defense — remember that trial balloon? — I have no objection to him as Secretary of State. It really doesn’t matter who has the job, because the Secretary is not going to be able to replace the President’s rotten foreign policy.

    After all, Hillary Clinton had exactly zero qualifications to be Secretary of State, other than having slept with Bill Clinton, and apparently a lot of women meet that standard. (I hear Monica Lewinsky needs a job, and she does have experience in bowing down before heads of state.) John Kerry won’t be notably better than Mrs Clinton, nor notably worse.

    The coldly realistic Dana (3e4784)

  13. Askeptic wrote:

    The entire National Security Team (SecState, SecDef, DNI, CIA, National Security Advisor, & the UN Amb) need to be sacked, and replaced – not recycled!

    What difference would it make? The one who really needed to be replaced was re-elected, and he’s the one who sets policy; the others are just his minions.

    The very realistic Dana (3e4784)

  14. Why should America have any faith in your judgment if you thought that John Edwards was fit to hold the office of Vice-President?

    kyle (0f75bb)

  15. Comment by The very realistic Dana (3e4784) — 12/18/2012 @ 12:44 pm

    Because they need to suffer some embarrassment and/or loss, for the damage that they have done to the country; and as a reminder to their replacements that phuqueing-up has consequences.

    askeptic (b8ab92)

  16. Askeptic wrote:

    Because they need to suffer some embarrassment and/or loss, for the damage that they have done to the country; and as a reminder to their replacements that phuqueing-up has consequences.

    Really? The consequences of President Obama’s fouling up for the last four years was a second term. Tell me more about those consequences.

    The Dana who noted who won the election (f68855)

  17. “What guarantees do we have that you will not promote your rich wife’s interests?”

    “How do you respond to the claim that you’re just another rich guy who cannot relate to the other 99%?”

    “Back in 1971, Doonesbury lampooned you as a self-promoting narcissist. What has changed since then?”

    Kevin M (bf8ad7)

  18. “Frankly, I think the way things are going, the job should go to a Muslim. Will you convert to Islam to get the job, Senator Kerry? If not, why not? Is there something wrong with Islam?”

    Kevin M (bf8ad7)

  19. Off-topic: We ought to have a pool on the date the NY Times first suggests that the 22nd Amendment is outdated.

    Kevin M (bf8ad7)

  20. Sen. Kerry…through March, 2004, you (and your staff) denied your participation in a Nov, 1971, VVAW meeting in Kansas City during which a plan to assassinate elected government officials was seriously debated and voted upon. In fact, throughout your career and prior to the publication of Douglas Brinkley’s biography on you, you claimed to have resigned from leadership of the VVAW in July of that year. Subsequently, in Brinkley’s book, you told Brinkley you wrote a letter of resignation on 10 Nov, 2 days prior to the commencement of the Kansas City meeting, which you purported to be on file with other VVAW papers in Wisconsin. Neither Mr. Brinkley nor anyone else was able to locate that purported letter.

    In March, 2004, anti-war/VVAW historian Gerald Nicosia definitively placed you at that meeting in Kansas City via a review of FBI surveillance documents. He also received eyewitness testimony from multiple sources placing you at that meeting.

    Subsequent to Mr. Nicosia’s revelation of your attendance at this meeting, you still insisted you did not recall attending but would yield to the incontrovertible proof of your attendance there.

    Mr. Kerry…if you cannot recall participating in a debate involving a plan to ASSASSINATE elected government officials, how can we assume you have the intellectual acumen to assume leadership of our State Department?

    Argus (84698f)

  21. Dukakis said no:

    http://hotair.com/archives/2012/12/17/dukakis-no-i-wont-take-kerrys-interim-senate-seat-opening/

    (He wants no interruption in his teaching duties)

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  22. 8. Sen. Kerry, you served mere months in Vietnam, pissed off nearly every officer who served with you, then served in the Senate with no real legislative accomplishments. What makes you think you are qualified…

    Comment by ukuleledave (c59551) — 12/18/2012 @ 9:08 am

    Sen. Kerry responds, “Have you taken a look at who’s President lately?”

    In a sane world anyone who thought Kerry was qualified to be SecState would be laughed off the national stage.

    But in the world we live in the fact that the bizarrely named Accountability Review Board (which holds no one accountable) found gross security lapses and failures at the senior leadership level in the State Dept. to blame for the Benghazi debacle will not end Hillary!’s career.

    Again, in a sane world it would. The person in charge of an organization is directly responsible for leadership failures. And really Obama would be responsible as well.

    In point of fact, they’ve both said they are ultimately responsible.

    They will demonstrate that they will not hold themselves accountable. They are not responsible.

    So they will get the credit for taking responsibility because they held press conferences in which they mouthed words to that effect while at the same time not pay any sort of price that one who is actually holding themselves responsible would expect to and be willing to pay.

    In a sane world putting in time in an organization like the DoS in Hillary!’s case, or the Senate in Kerry’s, wouldn’t be enough. They’d actually have to demonstrate some sort of accomplishment as opposed to just demonstrating their dead weight.

    We don’t live in a sane world. Hence Obama’s second term.

    Steve57 (25fb74)

  23. We don’t live in a sane world. Hence Obama’s second term.
    Comment by Steve57 (25fb74) — 12/19/2012 @ 3:39 pm

    Ain’t that the truth!

    askeptic (b8ab92)

  24. I heard (I think on the NBC Nightly News) that Senators do not want to hold hearings on a Kerry nomination until Hillary Clinton testifies. (there’s thinking she is trying to evade it all)

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.2567 secs.